About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

32 Ark. L. Rev. 253 (1978-1979)
Impeachment, Address, and the Removal of Judges in Arkansas: An Historical Perspective

handle is hein.journals/arklr32 and id is 269 raw text is: Impeachment, Address, and the Removal of Judges in Arkansas: An Historical Perspective Stephen A. Smith* On May 18, 1977, the Joint Interim Committee on Legislative Affairs of the Arkansas General Assembly adopted Interim Resolu- tion 77-1, providing for an investigation and determination of whether good cause existed to remove from office by the process of joint address Judge Means of the Seventh Judicial District. News reports called the investigation unprecedented1 and noted that the procedure of, joint address, provided for in Article XV, § 3 of the Arkansas Constitution of 1874, had never been used in the docu- ment's 103-year history.2 Counsel for the judge appeared before the committee and challenged the authority of the committee and the constitutionality of the joint address provision, contending that a judge could be removed from office only by impeachment proceed- ings or a court of law.3 The committee, on the advice of the Attorney General,4 determined that it was on firm constitutional ground and began the first legislative investigation of a judge under our present Arkansas Constitution. The investigation and removal of judges, however, was not un- known in Arkansas history. In a forty-two year period between 1832 and 1874, fifteen judges were either investigated or removed from office .under the authority of four different statutory and constitu- tional provisions. Since current interest in judicial tenure and remov- al has been generated by the Means incident, this article will examine the various methods which have been used and review the specific circumstances surrounding the investigation and removal of judges in Arkansas. It should be recognized, however, that pending federal legislation5 and the upcoming Arkansas Constitutional Convention may alter the legal picture in the future. 0 Mr. Smith is Administrative Assistant in the Office of the Arkansas Attorney General. 1. Lancaster, Legislative Committee votes to investigate Means' conduct, Arkansas Democrat, May 19, 1977, at IA; Ferguson, Panel votes for Means hearings, Benton Courier, May 19, 1977, at 1. 2. Dumas, The Means Investigation Becomes a Prickly Matter, Arkansas Gazette, August 28, 1977, at 3E. 3. Hearings on Interim Resolution 77-1, in the Matter of Investigation of the Judge of the Seventh Judicial District, Before the Joint Interim Committee on Legislative Affairs, 71 st Gen. Ass. of Ark., 6 (June 15, 1977). See also Lancaster, Judicial Independence Ignored, Arkansas Democrat, Sept. 4, 1977, at IA. 4. Id. at 11-12. 5. S.1423 is currently pending before the 95th Congress. For a discussion see Nunn, The Judicial Tenure Act, 13 TRIAL 26 (November, 1977).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most